[gentoo-council] Initial Meeting Summary for Yesterday's meeting.

[gentoo-council] Initial Meeting Summary for Yesterday's meeting.

[Thomas Anderson]

Attached, comments are, as always, welcomed. Quite long this time.

Regards,
Thomas
-- 
---------
Thomas Anderson
Gentoo Developer
/////////
Areas of responsibility:
AMD64, Secretary to the Gentoo Council
---------

Re: [gentoo-council] Initial Meeting Summary for Yesterday's meeting.

[Thomas Anderson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 505 bytes --]

On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 08:56:03PM -0400, Thomas Anderson wrote:
> Attached, comments are, as always, welcomed. Quite long this time.
> 
> Regards,
> Thomas
> -- 
> ---------
> Thomas Anderson
> Gentoo Developer
> /////////
> Areas of responsibility:
> AMD64, Secretary to the Gentoo Council
> ---------
> 
> 

As you've probably all noticed, I did not attach the file ;-)

-- 
---------
Thomas Anderson
Gentoo Developer
/////////
Areas of responsibility:
AMD64, Secretary to the Gentoo Council
---------

[-- Attachment #2: councilsummary-20090611.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3250 bytes --]

Roll Call:
===========
Betelgeuse: here
Cardoe: here
dertobi123: here 
dev-zero: here
leio: here
lu_zero: here
tanderson(secretary): here
ulm: here

Topics:
===========

     - Short discussion of EAPI 3 progress.
        Zac Medico(zmedico) commented that while no progress had been made, a
        tracker bug had been made[1] for those interested in providing patches
        for and tracking the progress of the EAPI 3 implementation. Ciaran
        McCreesh noted that paludis is ready for EAPI 3 whenever the portage
        implementation is finished.

    - Default contents of ACCEPT_LICENSE(license filtering).
        GLEP23[2] provided a method for users to select what licenses they are
        willing to accept based on a ACCEPT_LICENSE configuration variable. In
        addition it provided for 'license groups' so users could accept or
        decline to use software of a certain license type. What GLEP 23 did not
        specify was the default value of ACCEPT_LICENSE.

        Conclusion:
            The council unanimously voted to have the default ACCEPT_LICENSE
            value as ACCEPT_LICENSE="* -@EULA".

    - BASH 4 in EAPI 3.
        There were three parts to this topic:
            1) Unlocking of feature requests for EAPI 3.
            2) Allowing BASH 4 features in EAPI 3 ebuilds.
            3) Allowing BASH 4 features in all ebuilds after a fixed amount of
               time.

        Conclusion:
            By a 4-3 decision the council voted not to open the feature list for
            EAPI 3.

    - The banning of igli(Steve Long) from #gentoo-council.
        Tiziano Muller(dev-zero) banned igli from #-council for what he called
        repeated trolling after private warnings. The ban was later reversed by
        Doug Goldstein(Cardoe) because it had not been put to a council vote as
        all bans in #-council are.

        Conclusion:
            No decision yet, the council decided to discuss this issue privately
            on the council@ alias so that previous meeting time is not spent.

    - Define EAPI development/deployment cycles.
        Various Council members expressed support for Ciaran McCreesh's EAPI
        development guidelines as outlined in [3]. However, the discussion
        reached no conclusion and quickly spiraled into a discussion of the
        removal of Ciaran McCreesh's bugzilla privileges.

    - Removal of Ciaran McCreesh's(ciaranm) bugzilla permissions.
        At some point in the last year ciaranm's bugzilla permissions were
        removed. He filed a bug about the issue(#273759) and was talking about
        moving PMS off of Gentoo Infrastructure, a move that some council
        members were strongly opposed to.

        Conclusion:
            The council voted to reinstate Ciaran's editbugs privileges over the
            strong protests of Ned Ludd(solar) who said it would destroy
            timestamp information for detecting who removed his privileges in
            the first place and was against established infra process.

[1]: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=273620
[2]: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0023.html
[3]: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_d3a4758c455fded00608e891f525d3cc.xml

Re: [gentoo-council] Initial Meeting Summary for Yesterday's meeting.

[Ulrich Mueller]

>>>>> On Fri, 12 Jun 2009, Thomas Anderson wrote:

>> Attached, comments are, as always, welcomed. Quite long this time.

But you were quick nevertheless. :-)

>   - The banning of igli(Steve Long) from #gentoo-council.
>     [...]
>           No decision yet, the council decided to discuss this issue privately
>           on the council@ alias so that previous meeting time is not spent.
                                          ^^^^^^^^
precious?

>   - Removal of Ciaran McCreesh's(ciaranm) bugzilla permissions.
>     [...]
>       Conclusion:
>           The council voted to reinstate Ciaran's editbugs privileges over the
>           strong protests of Ned Ludd(solar) who said it would 
>           timestamp information for detecting who removed his privileges in
>           the first place and was against established infra process.

Can you find a more neutral wording here? (From bug 273759 I conclude
that robbat2 was successful with the investigation.) How about:

"The council voted to reinstate Ciaran's editbugs privileges. Ned Ludd
(solar) noted that infra will investigate who removed the privileges
in the first place, and asks for not changing bugzilla status before."

Ulrich

Re: [gentoo-council] Initial Meeting Summary for Yesterday's meeting.

[Luca Barbato]

Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> "The council voted to reinstate Ciaran's editbugs privileges. Ned Ludd
> (solar) noted that infra will investigate who removed the privileges
> in the first place, and asks for not changing bugzilla status before."

and append also "When asked about Ciaran wasn't against waiting few days
in order to have the investigation complete"

lu

-- 

Luca Barbato
Gentoo Council Member
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero

Re: [gentoo-council] Initial Meeting Summary for Yesterday's meeting.

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 723 bytes --]

Thomas Anderson wrote:

>             The council voted to reinstate Ciaran's editbugs privileges over the
>             strong protests of Ned Ludd(solar) who said it would destroy
>             timestamp information for detecting who removed his privileges in
>             the first place and was against established infra process.

It's worth noting that solar only pointed out the timestamp issue after
it was done not before announcing the intention to do so. Granted we
could have acked with less speed but I didn't see any reason to spend
more time on the issue. For my part Ciaramn could have the privs back
and if infra wanted to do further research I had no problem with that.

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 261 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-council] Initial Meeting Summary for Yesterday's meeting.

[Thomas Anderson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1159 bytes --]

On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 06:42:03PM +0300, Petteri R??ty wrote:
> Thomas Anderson wrote:
> 
> >             The council voted to reinstate Ciaran's editbugs privileges over the
> >             strong protests of Ned Ludd(solar) who said it would destroy
> >             timestamp information for detecting who removed his privileges in
> >             the first place and was against established infra process.
> 
> It's worth noting that solar only pointed out the timestamp issue after
> it was done not before announcing the intention to do so. Granted we
> could have acked with less speed but I didn't see any reason to spend
> more time on the issue. For my part Ciaramn could have the privs back
> and if infra wanted to do further research I had no problem with that.

That's quite tough to put in a summary to be honest, when there are all sorts of
opinions on a decision. I tried to keep a balance between all the parties in the
new version, which is attached.

> Regards,
> Petteri
> 

Thanks for the comments guys.


-- 
---------
Thomas Anderson
Gentoo Developer
/////////
Areas of responsibility:
AMD64, Secretary to the Gentoo Council
---------

[-- Attachment #2: councilsummary-20090611.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3500 bytes --]

Roll Call:
===========
Betelgeuse: here
Cardoe: here
dertobi123: here 
dev-zero: here
leio: here
lu_zero: here
tanderson(secretary): here
ulm: here

Topics:
===========

     - Short discussion of EAPI 3 progress.
        Zac Medico(zmedico) commented that while no progress had been made, a
        tracker bug had been made[1] for those interested in providing patches
        for and tracking the progress of the EAPI 3 implementation. Ciaran
        McCreesh noted that paludis is ready for EAPI 3 whenever the portage
        implementation is finished.

    - Default contents of ACCEPT_LICENSE(license filtering).
        GLEP23[2] provided a method for users to select what licenses they are
        willing to accept based on a ACCEPT_LICENSE configuration variable. In
        addition it provided for 'license groups' so users could accept or
        decline to use software of a certain license type. What GLEP 23 did not
        specify was the default value of ACCEPT_LICENSE.

        Conclusion:
            The council unanimously voted to have the default ACCEPT_LICENSE
            value as ACCEPT_LICENSE="* -@EULA".

    - BASH 4 in EAPI 3.
        There were three parts to this topic:
            1) Unlocking of feature requests for EAPI 3.
            2) Allowing BASH 4 features in EAPI 3 ebuilds.
            3) Allowing BASH 4 features in all ebuilds with EAPIs >= 3 after a 
               fixed amount of time in gentoo-x86(Overlays could begin use
               immediately).

        Conclusion:
            By a 4-3 decision the council voted not to open the feature list for
            EAPI 3.

    - The banning of igli(Steve Long) from #gentoo-council.
        Tiziano Muller(dev-zero) banned igli from #-council for what he called
        repeated trolling after private warnings. The ban was later reversed by
        Doug Goldstein(Cardoe) because it had not been put to a council vote as
        all bans in #-council are.

        Conclusion:
            No decision yet, the council decided to discuss this issue privately
            on the council@ alias so that precious meeting time is not spent.

    - Define EAPI development/deployment cycles.
        Various Council members expressed support for Ciaran McCreesh's EAPI
        development guidelines as outlined in [3]. However, the discussion
        reached no conclusion and quickly spiraled into a discussion of the
        removal of Ciaran McCreesh's bugzilla privileges.

    - Removal of Ciaran McCreesh's(ciaranm) bugzilla permissions.
        At some point in the last year ciaranm's bugzilla permissions were
        removed. He filed a bug about the issue(#273759) and was talking about
        moving PMS off of Gentoo Infrastructure, a move that some council
        members were strongly opposed to. When asked about the permissions,
        Ciaran had no objections to waiting a few days for the infra to complete
        an investigation into who removed the access and for what reason.

        Conclusion:
            The council voted to reinstate Ciaran's editbugs privileges. Ned
            Ludd (solar) noted that infra will investigate who removed the privileges
            in the first place, and asked for not changing bugzilla privileges before
            this is completed.

[1]: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=273620
[2]: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0023.html
[3]: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_d3a4758c455fded00608e891f525d3cc.xml